orphans

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It fails to mention what the output format is, whether subfolders are included, or how the boolean parameters 'total' and 'all' affect the listing. This lack of detail impairs safe and correct invocation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is extremely terse (6 words), but it is under-specification rather than conciseness. Important parameter semantics and behavioral details are omitted, making the description insufficient for reliable use.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the lack of annotations, no output schema, and minimal parameter descriptions, the description is severely incomplete. It does not provide enough context for an AI agent to correctly select and invoke this tool, especially compared to the many sibling tools.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is only 33% (only 'vault' has a description). The description does not explain the 'total' or 'all' parameters at all, leaving their behavior completely unspecified. Since coverage is low, the description should compensate but does not.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool lists files with no incoming links, which is a specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'deadends' which might also list files with no outgoing links, so some ambiguity remains.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'deadends' or 'backlinks'. The description only states what it does without any usage context.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.